User talk:Korlzor

Hello, Korlzor, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.

September 2008

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Hyundai Genesis worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

F1 key colours

Those were the colours decided upon by consensus, and they are consistent across the many hundreds of F1 articles. Also, the colours have to be light enough to see the written in the boxes. Plus, since F1 has no connection with medals, or gold / silver / bronze in any case, the colours are only a rough guide. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think the colours look terrible - far too gaudy. But I'll let someone else revert the Schumacher article and we can get their view. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's about making the tables easy on the eye, rather than "brutal", but I'm happy to let someone else give their opinion. I don't think there's any chance of changing the key though, partly because of the colours, and partly because of the weeks of work involved in changing all the articles. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the extra line in the table - again, it's not just one table, it's hundreds and hundreds, and there doesn't seem to be any real need for it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, the articles on teams, cars, race reports etc, plus all the other formulae. Together there are thousands. In any case, the wikiproject won't go for it, I suspect, simply because of the appearance of it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you also Wikitestor

Is or was Wikitestor also an account of yours? Tennis expert (talk) 08:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your aggressive and sometimes incivil edit summaries (along with your discussion page posts) are remarkably similar to those used by the disruptive Wikitestor and his sockpuppets. See, e.g., 62.57.196.206, 62.57.197.114, and 62.57.9.202. Tennis expert (talk) 19:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of the blue this one apperas by Wikitestor: diff. Compare this with Korlzor's earlier diff. Hmm. --HJensen, talk 22:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And a new IP edit: here. --HJensen, talk 06:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rafael Nadal. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. GlassCobra 19:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours for edit warring on Rafael Nadal. It is essential that you are more careful to discuss controversial changes with the user in question, rather than simply revert them repeatedly: this applies even if you think or know you are correct. Edit warring helps nobody, and actually harms the page in question, and the encyclopedia. To contest this block please place {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Tiptoety ^talk 20:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to evade your block using IP's, your block will be extended. Tiptoety ^talk 20:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remark: this seems like a sound block to me, in light of this user's recent actions. AGK 20:49, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 days in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. MBisanz ^talk 20:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing another's userspace

Hello. Do you have a good reason for this edit? A good reason being Tennis Expert asked you to do it?

I'd be happy to assume good faith, but I'm afraid your track record doesn't really give me much reason to. I sincerely hope there's a good explanation and that you're not trolling and trying to wind Tennis Expert up. --Dweller (talk) 20:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware of what he's doing. Please don't edit yourself into another block by trying to wind other users up. I'm going to revert you. --Dweller (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for incivility and edit warring. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. GlassCobra 17:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Korlzor. Thank you. Tennis expert (talk) 22:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banned

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. To contest this block, please email me or place {{unblock|your reason here}} on your page, including an explanation why you feel you should be unblocked. I think it is fair to say that after the extensive block evasion revealed in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Korlzor, you may consider yourself banned. Goodbye. Guy (Help!) 19:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Miami Masters

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Miami Masters, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Yosef1987 (talk) 14:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]